Return to the CurtPalme.com main site CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum
A forum with a sense of fun and community for Home Theater enthusiasts!
Products for Sale ] [ FAQ: Hooking it all up ] [ CRT Primer/FAQ ] [ Best/Worst CRT Projectors List ] [ Setup Tips & Manuals ] [ Advanced Procedures ] [ Newsletter ]
 
Blu-ray disc release list and must-have titles. Buy the latest and best Blu-ray titles to show off in your home theater!

 As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! 

LUG's vs LCP's - which are better
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    CurtPalme.com Forum Index -> CRT Projectors
Author Message
redfox001



Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands

Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 6:44 pm    Post subject:

I could only do this superficial test quick. Using the same neckboards is better but I have to mod neckboards for that. Might try it but I remember Barclay testing the old neckboards with lug and lcp and he said lug was to dimm. Might find the topic back.

_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
Back to top
redfox001



Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands

Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 6:55 pm    Post subject:

barclay66 wrote:
CasetheCorvetteman wrote:
Yeah theyre not cheap, but theyre apparently better tubes.

Honestly, I'm not quite sure about that.
Although the LUGs have a smaller spot size, You have to drive them harder than the LCPs as the smaller spot emits less light. And my experience with LUGs (I made several tests with different color LUGs) teached me that they are much more prone to blooming when driven at higher contrast levels. So the blooming will eat up the spot size advantage in most cases.
I simply have the feeling that the LUG's system design isn't perfectly compatible with the differential drive of the Marquee where the beam intensity is controlled by the voltage difference between the cathode and the G1 grid.
The BR909 and later models with LUGs do that differently. They leave the G1 grid on a controlled level and drive the cathode with a much higher voltage. Maybe the LUG's design works best in this configuration...

Regards,
barclay66


https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=37820.html

This might be what you said about modifying the neckboard grid drive?

_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
Back to top
redfox001



Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands

Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 7:00 pm    Post subject:

Oh by the way I can also confirm that the noise that runs on the screen is gone with the 9518lc.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
Back to top
mp20748



Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland

TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM

Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 8:11 pm    Post subject:

redfox001 wrote:
barclay66 wrote:
CasetheCorvetteman wrote:
Yeah theyre not cheap, but theyre apparently better tubes.

Honestly, I'm not quite sure about that.
Although the LUGs have a smaller spot size, You have to drive them harder than the LCPs as the smaller spot emits less light. And my experience with LUGs (I made several tests with different color LUGs) teached me that they are much more prone to blooming when driven at higher contrast levels. So the blooming will eat up the spot size advantage in most cases.
I simply have the feeling that the LUG's system design isn't perfectly compatible with the differential drive of the Marquee where the beam intensity is controlled by the voltage difference between the cathode and the G1 grid.
The BR909 and later models with LUGs do that differently. They leave the G1 grid on a controlled level and drive the cathode with a much higher voltage. Maybe the LUG's design works best in this configuration...

Regards,
barclay66


https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=37820.html

This might be what you said about modifying the neckboard grid drive?


He makes good points there, but what I've done was tune the Marquee neck boards to work better with the LUG's, because the tubes are quite different technically
Back to top
mp20748



Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland

TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM

Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 8:12 pm    Post subject:

redfox001 wrote:
Oh by the way I can also confirm that the noise that runs on the screen is gone with the 9518lc.



I also see less noise with this chassis
Back to top
mp20748



Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland

TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM

Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 8:14 pm    Post subject:

redfox001 wrote:
I could only do this superficial test quick. Using the same neckboards is better but I have to mod neckboards for that. Might try it but I remember Barclay testing the old neckboards with lug and lcp and he said lug was to dimm. Might find the topic back.


Good to know. I think we'll get a chance to look further into this over the next week or so. So I'll be looking forward to learn and maybe add something more to this discussion -- thanks for sharing
Back to top
mp20748



Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland

TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM

Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 3:28 pm    Post subject:

These are quick and dirty shots showing the work I've done on an older set of Electrohome neck boards to match them to LUG's specifically. Before working on the VDC newer neck boards and using them until today, my setup basically set for awhile, because even a set of my modified Electrohome neck boards were not enough to get the level of sharpness of the LUG's in my 9518 I'm used to.

I'll eventually dial the set in better and do more shots. Just thought the improvements were even worth posting them as-is even before anything is done to the PJ.

The light at the bottom of the images is light bleeding through a painted slider door.

















Back to top
tschaeikaei



Joined: 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 490
Location: Germany/Saarland

Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2016 12:11 am    Post subject:

Quote:
I used the i1pro and maximised the lumens as usual during calibration

Could you explain what exactly do you do to maximize brightness during setup?
I'm currently doing a setup on my 2 9500 and this could really help.
Thank you, Regards, Julian

_________________
Marquee 9500U edgeblend P43 | NEC 9PG
Back to top
redfox001



Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands

Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2016 9:49 pm    Post subject:

Ok I think you mean maximising contrast. With contrast I look at the maximum where there is no blooming or other strange stuff than I put up a 100 ire windowed testpattern and measure the light. If I am above 11 ftL I lower because I do not want to wear the tubes to fast. So not very helpfull I am afraid?

The brightness should be set using a testpattern with several grades of black and the one with 16 should be just visible. Set brightness at 50 and use g2 to get there. At the end of the calibration my brightness is 50 but sometimes I change a little after.

_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
Back to top
mp20748



Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland

TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 8:53 am    Post subject:

I had mentioned in this thread that I had tuned a set of the older Marquee neck boards to the LUG tubes in my latest Marquee. The screenshot above are after I made those changes. The changes are me using my pattern generator and some of its known test patterns to better match what I'm used to seeing on the LCP's.

My initial impression of the LUG's when I first got this projector was a not so sharp image when used with the older Electrohome (modified) neck boards. That was the first thing I noticed, with the second thing that jumped out at me was a more laid-back image that seem to require a more intense drive to produce the same or similar punch I'm used to.

The newer VDC neck boards greatly improved on the focus, but had other issues. It wasn't able to drive the tubes the way I'm used to with the LCP's.

So what I did using my pattern generator was better align the older Electrohome neck boards with the LUG's and that made for better focus and greatly improved drive. And that may be seen in my posted screenshots above In this thread.


I've since went one further after Barclay posted somewhere on the HK grid in the LUG's, an enlightenment that took me back to the bench. My previous thought on the HK grid is that is was simply some form of static grid, to then find out by looking into my red CRT myself, that it is a full grid element in the CRT itself. So from there, I'm back in my shop as soon as things got really quiet around here.


And after looking at everything in the manuals, I found that the document that Barclay posted showed the HK grid requiring an 1 meg resistor to ground. Looking at the Barco 909 manual, they followed that document with an 1 meg to ground. I then looked at the Sony G90. It used an 10 meg to ground Shocked while both VDC and Electrohome's were using the 330K that was just a pin hold-down resistor for a not use pin in the LCP design.

So my first move or change was going from the 330K to an 2.61 meg resistor to ground on my Marquee with the LUG's. The changes were very noticeable and it was an improvement over the above shots. But before starting on this Barclay suggested a range of resistors to try. I didn't feel a need to go below 1 meg or try the 1 meg at that point, so the 2.61 meg was it. All until I put 4.7 meg's in yesterday..WOW Not sure if it can be seen in my latest screenshots in the screeenshot thread, but boy was that a change for the better.

I like the word sharper, but think much tighter and sharper would be better. And, I still have a ways to go before the 10 meg change..


Last edited by mp20748 on Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:40 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
redfox001



Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 9:58 am    Post subject:

Ok the note in the doc barclay posted says the lug 3pf is correct when over 1 MOhm 1/2 watt is used on the KH grid. They mention 1/2 watt but do not think there is 1/2 watt current going to that grid so perhaps the 1/2 watt for other reasons? Did you try different watt resistors?
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
Back to top
mp20748



Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland

TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM

Posted: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:19 am    Post subject:

redfox001 wrote:
Ok the note in the doc barclay posted says the lug 3pf is correct when over 1 MOhm 1/2 watt is used on the KH grid. They mention 1/2 watt but do not think there is 1/2 watt current going to that grid so perhaps the 1/2 watt for other reasons? Did you try different watt resistors?


Wattage shouldn't be an issue there, but a high voltage or shock rated resistor like Carbon or Carbon film should be used.
Back to top
haireez



Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 207
Location: singapore

TV/Projector: Vidikron Vision 1 - Ultra

Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2016 11:35 am    Post subject:

Mike,

Please update us if you manage to get the best solution to modified VNB that could drive lug tubes on Marquee. I might try to get lug tubes to install on my vision 1. Do we need to get 909 yokes as well for best results?

_________________
2 White Vision 1
Back to top
mp20748



Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland

TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM

Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2016 12:43 pm    Post subject:

haireez wrote:
Mike,

Please update us if you manage to get the best solution to modified VNB that could drive lug tubes on Marquee. I might try to get lug tubes to install on my vision 1. Do we need to get 909 yokes as well for best results?



Normally the LUG would need the Sony 1292 or Barco 909 yokes in order to focus properly. But after getting my Marquee 9518 (came with LUG's) on initial evaluation with it's later version VDC neck boards, the image was sharp. After installing it on my ceiling and putting in a set of the older Electohome neck board that have been the more common ones found in all Marquees, they did not produce that sharper image (test pattern grid) I saw with the VDC neck boards.

So playing with the newer VDC neck boards I discovered a way to better address the difference between the two differtent CRT's that's usually used in the Marquee (LUG/LCP). And that is when I started modifying the set of Electrohome (earlier version) neck boards to work with my LUG tubes.

So for a while now, I've been using the earlier version neck boards that I have modified to work even better than the VDC boards. So with either lines, grids or even movie image, I can't find a reason to install the 909 focus coils I have on my previous Marquee (now my test bed unit).



Right now, my Marquee projects the sharpest and more detailed images I've even seen. And it's doing it with STOCK focus coils.

This particular setup produces an image that's very detailed with incredible low-end performance.


I would go one further and say, if your goal is a bright and sharp 1080P image for HD use, go or stay LCP. if you're more tuned to a very high definition image with a very film like and greater low-end performance, consider the LUG's. Now the only downside I notice for the LUG's, the brighter you drive them the more you'll loose that High Definition look.
Back to top
greg9518lc



Joined: 19 Apr 2016
Posts: 360


Posted: Wed May 18, 2016 6:29 pm    Post subject:

mp20748 wrote:
haireez wrote:
Mike,

Please update us if you manage to get the best solution to modified VNB that could drive lug tubes on Marquee. I might try to get lug tubes to install on my vision 1. Do we need to get 909 yokes as well for best results?



Normally the LUG would need the Sony 1292 or Barco 909 yokes in order to focus properly. But after getting my Marquee 9518 (came with LUG's) on initial evaluation with it's later version VDC neck boards, the image was sharp. After installing it on my ceiling and putting in a set of the older Electohome neck board that have been the more common ones found in all Marquees, they did not produce that sharper image (test pattern grid) I saw with the VDC neck boards.

So playing with the newer VDC neck boards I discovered a way to better address the difference between the two differtent CRT's that's usually used in the Marquee (LUG/LCP). And that is when I started modifying the set of Electrohome (earlier version) neck boards to work with my LUG tubes.

So for a while now, I've been using the earlier version neck boards that I have modified to work even better than the VDC boards. So with either lines, grids or even movie image, I can't find a reason to install the 909 focus coils I have on my previous Marquee (now my test bed unit).



Right now, my Marquee projects the sharpest and more detailed images I've even seen. And it's doing it with STOCK focus coils.

This particular setup produces an image that's very detailed with incredible low-end performance.


I would go one further and say, if your goal is a bright and sharp 1080P image for HD use, go or stay LCP. if you're more tuned to a very high definition image with a very film like and greater low-end performance, consider the LUG's. Now the only downside I notice for the LUG's, the brighter you drive them the more you'll loose that High Definition look.


So stay with the neck cards I already have or get the updated. Pm me a price on the new neck cards when you get time.

_________________
VDC 9518LC modded: I do not sell or promote mods only interested in the best PQ possible......
Back to top
thewolfman



Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 1311
Location: Sweden

Posted: Wed May 18, 2016 7:56 pm    Post subject:

greg9518lc wrote:
mp20748 wrote:
haireez wrote:
Mike,

Please update us if you manage to get the best solution to modified VNB that could drive lug tubes on Marquee. I might try to get lug tubes to install on my vision 1. Do we need to get 909 yokes as well for best results?



Normally the LUG would need the Sony 1292 or Barco 909 yokes in order to focus properly. But after getting my Marquee 9518 (came with LUG's) on initial evaluation with it's later version VDC neck boards, the image was sharp. After installing it on my ceiling and putting in a set of the older Electohome neck board that have been the more common ones found in all Marquees, they did not produce that sharper image (test pattern grid) I saw with the VDC neck boards.

So playing with the newer VDC neck boards I discovered a way to better address the difference between the two differtent CRT's that's usually used in the Marquee (LUG/LCP). And that is when I started modifying the set of Electrohome (earlier version) neck boards to work with my LUG tubes.

So for a while now, I've been using the earlier version neck boards that I have modified to work even better than the VDC boards. So with either lines, grids or even movie image, I can't find a reason to install the 909 focus coils I have on my previous Marquee (now my test bed unit).



Right now, my Marquee projects the sharpest and more detailed images I've even seen. And it's doing it with STOCK focus coils.

This particular setup produces an image that's very detailed with incredible low-end performance.


I would go one further and say, if your goal is a bright and sharp 1080P image for HD use, go or stay LCP. if you're more tuned to a very high definition image with a very film like and greater low-end performance, consider the LUG's. Now the only downside I notice for the LUG's, the brighter you drive them the more you'll loose that High Definition look.


So stay with the neck cards I already have or get the updated. Pm me a price on the new neck cards when you get time.


Yes, but having the Barco 909 focus coils on, that I bought, must make for an even better and sharper image. Can't hurt, that's my philosophy.
Back to top
cmjohnson



Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s

Posted: Wed May 18, 2016 11:00 pm    Post subject:

Be aware that the 909 focus coils are designed by Kanto-Denshi to be part of a complete SYSTEM, consisting of both the
deflection yoke and the focus yoke.

There is a substantial difference in the relative lengths and positions of Thomson deflection and focus yokes as compared to Kanto-Denshi (Barco) deflection and focus yokes.

This is PROBABLY the reason why Frankenyokes are often problematic, simply because the longer Thomson deflection yoke forces
the K-D focus yoke to be set back almost an inch farther back on the tube neck than it was designed to be placed.

The obvious answer to this problem is to investigate the possibility of retrofitting the K-D deflection yokes to the Marquee AS WELL
as the focus yoke.

But that is far from a plug and play operation requiring only a few wires to be swapped around in the connector.

While adapting the focus yoke requires changing the wiring harness, and then to truly optimize it you have to adjust some
component values in the resonant drive circuits on the focus board, making changes to the deflection yoke is a somewhat
deeper kettle of fish.

While the Thomson and K-D deflection yokes have the same deflection windings, they're connected differently and
thus you have to do some serious re-engineering just to get all the wires rearranged and all plumbed in to suitable terminal strips
for connection to the new wiring harness.

I found that to rewire a K-D deflection yoke just to be mechanically suitable for Marquee use, you will have to gut the Thomson
deflection yoke (and convergence coil) assembly of all three of its terminal strips and glue them to the K-D yoke after removing
its own unique type of terminal strip, which doesn't have the space or the number of contacts needed for the change.

And after all that is done, after you've ensured that you've got every coil wired correctly to its mate, after you have separated
the left and right half coils for H deflection, at their middle connection point, so as to make them electrically separate like the
Thomson yoke is, after all that you then have to look at the inductance values and start figuring out how to adapt the drive
capacitance values on the HDM to restore resonance to THAT circuit as well.

I've made a start at this. I have NOT finished the first prototype yet.

What's the light at the end of the tunnel? Barco rates the 909 for 3200x2560 resolution with LUG tubes. With the RIGHT
magnetics, and PROPERLY adapted drive circuits, there is absolutely no reason at all why a Marquee equipped with the same
LUG tubes can't get the same performance as the 909.

So it's worth some effort to achieve.


Last edited by cmjohnson on Thu May 19, 2016 1:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Tim in Phoenix



Joined: 21 Oct 2006
Posts: 4409
Location: Phoenix

Posted: Wed May 18, 2016 11:12 pm    Post subject:

cmjohnson wrote:

The obvious answer to this problem is to investigate the possibility of retrofitting the K-D deflection yokes to the Marquee AS WELL
as the focus yoke.

But that is far from a plug and play operation requring only a few wires to be swapped around in the connector.


Guys

If the 909 deflection yokes have two sets of H windings, mebbe, otherwise the HDM will probably shut down.
Back to top
cmjohnson



Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s

Posted: Wed May 18, 2016 11:17 pm    Post subject:

The 909 deflection yokes have the same windings, wind for wind, as the Thomson yokes, but they are connected differently
and that has to be changed in the rewiring.

The Thomson yoke has two separated H windings, and each of them presents two separate connections to the HDM, so that
these two separate coils can be connected either in series or in parallel via the HDM's switching relays.

The K-D deflection yoke also has two separate H windings, but they are soldered together at one point, creating what
is best described as a Y configuration with a common terminal for both windings. That center connection has to be undone
and then both windings can be brought out to four terminal points like the Thomson deflection yoke.
Back to top
thewolfman



Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 1311
Location: Sweden

Posted: Wed May 18, 2016 11:41 pm    Post subject:

cmjohnson wrote:
Be aware that the 909 focus coils are designed by Kanto-Denshi to be part of a complete SYSTEM, consisting of both the
deflection yoke and the focus yoke.

There is a substantial difference in the relative lengths and positions of Thomson deflection and focus yokes as compared to Kanto-Denshi (Barco) deflection and focus yokes.

This is PROBABLY the reason why Frankenyokes are often problematic, simply because the longer Thomson deflection yoke forces
the K-D focus yoke to be set back almost an inch farther back on the tube neck than it was designed to be placed
.

The obvious answer to this problem is to investigate the possibility of retrofitting the K-D deflection yokes to the Marquee AS WELL
as the focus yoke.

But that is far from a plug and play operation requring only a few wires to be swapped around in the connector.

While adapting the focus yoke requires changing the wiring harness, and then to truly optimize it you have to adjust some
component values in the resonant drive circuits on the focus board, making changes to the deflection yoke is a somewhat
deeper kettle of fish.

While the Thomson and K-D deflection yokes have the same deflection windings, they're connected differently and
thus you have to do some serious re-engineering just to get all the wires rearranged and all plumbed in to suitable terminal strips
for connection to the new wiring harness.

I found that to rewire a K-D deflection yoke just to be mechanically suitable for Marquee use, you will have to gut the Thomson
deflection yoke (and convergence coil) assembly of all three of its terminal strips and glue them to the K-D yoke after removing
its own unique type of terminal strip, which doesn't have the space or the number of contacts needed for the change.

And after all that is done, after you've ensured that you've got every coil wired correctly to its mate, after you have separated
the left and right half coils for H deflection, at their middle connection point, so as to make them electrically separate like the
Thomson yoke is, after all that you then have to look at the inductance values and start figuring out how to adapt the drive
capacitance values on the HDM to restore resonance to THAT circuit as well.

I've made a start at this. I have NOT finished the first prototype yet.

What's the light at the end of the tunnel? Barco rates the 909 for 3200x2560 resolution with LUG tubes. With the RIGHT
magnetics, and PROPERLY adapted drive circuits, there is absolutely no reason at all why a Marquee equipped with the same
LUG tubes can't get the same performance as the 909.

So it's worth some effort to achieve.


The only little thing that I can provide, is that one can make the Thomson deflection yoke + convergence yoke shorter by shaving it, it may sound silly to most you, but I stand by that making them 10 mm shorter must be a good thing. Lets call it 8 and keep 1 mm on the ring, to centralize them better, but a third way there of your inch.

The electronics is above my head but interesting read for sure.


image hosting free no registration



And btw, I would Paypal a sum of dollars for the next level of Frankenyokes to you, for your efforts to make them better.

Thanks.

upload pictures
Back to top
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    CurtPalme.com Forum Index -> CRT Projectors All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum